Culled from this IPS post and following, as well as this one.
The "OOOers" are a diverse bunch and have their own opinions of most
things. So you won't find a uniform opinion among them to your question.
They are not like kennilinguists, who take but one authority for all
answers to everything.
As for all that non-local woo woo, Morton might be more inclined but
Bryant not so much. If you search for 'hyperobject' or 'non-local' in
this thread you'll see a lot of that discussion. And my own take,
different still from either of them. And I consider myself an hOOOlon.
We might even say an hOOOlon includes adherents of integral
theory/practice, those who include OOO in their investigations as well
as a variety of other sources. You know, like integral. And
like an asshole (everyone has one), still maintain their own opinions
(each asshole is unique). And so are assholons, another story, despite
them wanting to control The Story.
hOOOlon: One who considers themselves an adherent of object oriented
ontology, yet still maintains their own substantial opinions* and unique
endo-structure.
FYI, theurjism is the term for my unique neologisms.
* Including those on the nature of OOO itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.